MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1919570871 · doi:10.4141/cjas-2014-041

Evaluation of ketogenic vs. glucogenic substrates as energy sources in starter diets for Holstein dairy calves

2014· article· en· W1919570871 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
H. Beiranvand, M. Khorvash, G.R. Ghorbani, Lisa Bachmann, S. Kargar

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropionateStarterAnimal scienceWeaningChemistryRumenSugarFood scienceSodium propionateFermentationBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beiranvand, H., Khorvash, M., Ghorbani, G. R., Homayouni, A., Bachmann, L. and Kargar, S. 2014. Evaluation of ketogenic vs. glucogenic substrates as energy sources in starter diets for Holstein dairy calves. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 94: 717–723. The objective of this study was to investigate the influence of the inclusion of granular sugar and sodium propionate as ketogenic and glucogenic substrates, respectively, in calf starter diets on the performance, weaning age, rumen fermentation characteristics and plasma β-hydroxybutyrate (βHBA). Twenty-one newborn male Holstein calves were housed in individual pens until 10 wk of age, receiving starter ad libitum, fresh water free choice, and fed four liters of pasteurized waste milk daily until weaning. Calves were randomly assigned to one of the following treatments: (1) no supplemental additive (Control); (2) granular sugar (5% of dietary DM; Sugar); and (3) sodium propionate (5% of dietary DM; Propionate). Overall, no differences were observed among treatments for starter intake, average daily gain, feed efficiency, day of weaning, body weight at weaning and at the end of the study. Body measurements including body length, hip height, hip width, and heart girth were remained unchanged among treatments. Ruminal fluid pH (5.36 to 5.58) and concentrations of total volatile fatty acids (93.1 to 101.6 mM), acetate (43.6 to 53.1 mM), propionate (30.5 to 35.1 mM), and ratio of acetate to propionate (1.42 to 1.89) were not affected by treatments over the experimental period. However, the concentration of butyrate was greater at 35 and 70 d of age in calves receiving Sugar compared with calves receiving Propionate, but not compared with the Control. Greater blood βHBA at 45, 60 and 70 d of age was noticed in calves fed Sugar compared with those fed Control and Propionate. In conclusion, according to the concentrations of supplemental ketogenic and glucogenic substrates used in the current experiment, sugar and sodium propionate in starter diets did not improve calf performance.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal Science→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→